This article is generating a lot of buzz here in NYC.

Have you ever tried the CR diet? If so, what were your experiences?
If not, what do you think of it?

I think that it is amazing how little food we need to sustain a nutritional life style. I am shocked by how little food we need in our daily lives. Our culture (particularly North American) has indoctrinated us to beleive that we must have huge portions.

KM - I agree. I always amazed me how much larger portions are getting, especially when you go out to a restaurant. I often find myself eating only half the meal, and taking the rest home for leftovers the next day.

How restricted are we talking?

@Ashley L: Give the article a quick skim...I believe the people described in it are living day-to-day life on what is, essentially, an aggressive version of Weight Watchers. Based on the description of their heights and weights, I'd say they are near the lower bound of their BMIs and have very low BF.

That's a bit of an odd article, on one hand it tries to portray how extreme their diet is and how few calories they eat then goes on to describe how they eat (the guys anyway) around 2000 calories a day. Hardly extreme.

What is extreme is the obsessing over weighing portions and meal planning and I get the feeling that's more about control than anything else.

@NYCinephile-- You always find the most provocative stuff!

After reading that piece, I felt no compulsion to live my life as its subjects do--with orange skin, calorie obsessive to the point of fanaticism, existing in near anorexia and chemical imbalance-induced euphoria. But articles always seek out drama. I'll be interested to hear if anyone has tried this approach to eating, and if the experiences described in the article are truly representative or are unfairly distorted.

The big question I kept having was: Is the diet weird to the extreme or are the people interviewed merely extremists?

If you want to know about CR diets, there's a website set up by CR practitioners:

http://www.calorierestriction.org/

From what I know about CR diets, it's based on a theory that reducing calories to a lower level will increase lifespan. I've seen arguments for and against this way of life. It's a little extreme for me, personally.

I am only eating 850 calories a day... That can probably be considered a CR.

Am I an extremist?

Well, I ain't no long haired dope smoking hippy if that's what you mean...

I am definitely an on or off type of person... like a light switch. it is either on or off.

I WISH I WAS A DIMMER SWITCH...

But instead I am either an on switch or an off switch.


Meaning... that there is no moderation in me what so ever.

When I eat... I eat alot

When I drink... I drink alot

So now I am on a 'CR' so that I can drop a lot of weight and in the process, I am attending a class for 1.5 hours per week to figure out how to be a dimmer switch.

I agree completely with Iain M. The diets featured in this article didn't seem unhealthy - they were certainly better than the junk food most people eat!

What turned me off was the extreme, almost-religious devotion to the diet. I realize they were being interviewed, so of course they spent time expressing their opinions, but I had the feeling that their conversation really wasn't much different than it would have been with anyone else. I've dated people on very restricted diets, and just like the folks in this article, they were crashing bores. Not able to talk about anything but the diet, and no interest in other folks except as potential converts. What good does it do to be that healthy if you become so obnoxious that no one else can stand you?

I'm on Nutrisystem, and I eat about 1200-1600 calories a day... down from over 5000 calories a day! It's definitely a calorie restriction diet, but I NEVER feel hungry. I've also lost about 15 lbs in about 3 1/2 weeks.

I think the portion control is a key to my success. I always ate SO darn much. It's almost a relief to finally feel full when eating regular food.

Well, I read it and I was shocked! 2000 calories?? I'm at 1400/day, and even when I lose my weight and go to maintanence, I don't expect to exceed 1800. The people in the article made it seem like eating under 2000 was CRAZY/INSANE. Um.... I know alot of people that do! Basically don't go out to eat or eat junk food and BAM you are there! I guess I just thought it was funny how they seem so OBSESSIVE as everyone else said. I am on a CR diet, I suppose, but not so obsessed...

I know - 2000 cals seems a lot to call 'calorie restriction' - I'm a 220 lb guy, with an incredibly sedentary lifestyle (I work all hours, 7 days a week), and I rarely take in more than 1200 cals in a day, and my weight doesn't budge.

I guess it's all to do with the american 'portion', which, as a brit, has never ceased to astound me - your 'portion' sizes are approx 3x ours - in this country a large (12") pizza is intended for at least three people, in the US it seems to be an intra-meal snack for a single person.

You are absolutely right Max. A few days ago I went to lunch with some friends, and I got so much food that I literally had enough for leftovers for dinner that night, and lunch the next day!

Yup.. Cheescake Factory and Bucca Di Beppo's are the worst Restaurant for insanely huge portions. One small spaghetti can feed 6 people comfortably... Lots of waster here in North America...

Great work Ben... Welcome aboard!

The discussion gets a higher profile.

From today's New York Times:

One for the Ages: A Prescription That May Extend Life

It is a very well written article. The topic is very relevant as well.

I can only speak for myself here. The idea of chasing after eternal youth or even extended mortality is nothing new. It has been around in cultural mythology since the beginning of recorded time.

I would argue that the gross opulence around us have lead to natural swing from excess to the austere. Some people are going to follow that faster than others.

Being avidly careful about the fuel you feed your body with is very good. Being obsessive to the point that your meals have to be planned down to the individual calorie is not.

It would seem that the individuals in this article have turned what and how much they eat into an object of pseudo worship. I am impressed with their self control and drive to live well. But at the same time it does like the author stated seem to have the earmarks of "cult" like behavior.

For me, it is eat less quantity, eat more often, eat better food and exercise smart. But then again that is just me.

NYCinephile - I just read that latest article off digg. Pretty interesting stuff really. They aren't real specific about actual calorie intake, but only say that it consists of eating about 30% less than "normal".

I stumbled onto this thread and was impressed with the level of comments. Some very thoughtful people. So I joined to give my opinions.

I am on a CR diet and have been so for about 2 1/2 years, with lapses. I've put together a website about my own experiences and the science behind the diet (http://www.nbrhd.net/CR/CR.htm), but I thought I would respond to some of the comments. I too read the New York Magazine article.

First, I intend to follow the diet the rest of my life. I really like it. I dropped 30 lbs at 1 to 2 lbs per week and I keep it at whatever I level I want. I have had several other measurable benefits. And I have learned a tremendous amount about nutrition. I also am colder (have a lower temperature) than before.

The difficulty of the diet is not cutting calories or losing weight. The difficulty is keeping track of what you eat and recording it, which is a real pain. I simply note down on a piece of paper what I eat during the day, then enter it each night. You really are not on a CR diet if you are not tracking nutrients.

As far as how devoted I am - well I feel no guilt about pigging out for a few days over Thanksgiving and Christmas and not tracking. Or else just entering 4500 calories and 70% fat for the day as a wild guess. I average the results over a week and am willing to fast a day (I find that easier than cutting back several hundred calories each day to get down).

I average 1750 to 1850 calories a day over the course of a week. I drop below 130lbs if I eat less than 1750 calories or so. (I am 5'7", so BMI of 120 - 121).

By the way, no one knows what it means for a human to be on CR. There are various estimates, but there absolutely is no valid measure of how many calories correspond to CR. And no one knows what nutrients are required, either, and certainly no one knows what specific level of nutrients are in any given portion of food one eats - there are too many variables from the farm (or factory) to the mouth.

So it is one big estimating game. You just do the best you can or are willing to do. Having said that, tracking the nutrients as best you can is critical to the diet.

I found that if I try to remember what I eat during the day without notes, I woefully underestimate it. I have lost the notes, put down everything I could remember, then found the notes - 100's upon 100's of calories invariably missed.

In response to some of the comments/questions (I think I already answered NYCinephile, Ashley L):

Iaian M, Ron Bell - like with anything there are people more or less rigorous in following the diet. Several articles I have read focus on people who are really, really into the diet and do things most people would consider odd. I think their actions are rational, but also odd. Examples I have read are licking a plate, peeling an apple and throwing away all but the peel, eating exactly the same thing every day, avoiding exercise. The odd thing I do (but only in the privacy of my home when guests are not around) is measure what I eat (grams or cups, for instance). In most circumstances I just guess and note it down shortly after eating. The one real feeling of control I have is that I now know, unequivocally, I can set my weight wherever I want to. After 20 years of slowly adding it on, that is a pleasurable feeling. But it costs me 15 to 20 minutes a day in recording data.

Snakeophelia - I hear you. I try to avoid proselytizing (He says as he writes thousands of words).

Maxwell Lamb - I would challenge you to carefully note down every single thing you eat right after you eat it one day. Measure the portion somehow if you can. Then look up the calories on www.nutritiondata.com - the best website I have yet found for everything about nutrition of foods. List the items and add it up on a spreadsheet. It seems unlikely to me that a 220 lb guy, no matter how sedentary, is subsisting on 1200 calories a day.

But I could be wrong.

Jeremiah Utech - I think we are basically at the same place. But it was an eye opener to me the first week I tracked calories and about 20 nutrients. I was so far below recommended RDA's in several nutrients. Zinc is a real bear to get enough of without using pills, which I try to avoid.

My last word: Popeye was right - eat your spinach. I have a great dish (no oil) on my website and now I eat a lot of it, because I have found no other food that gives so many nutrients for so few calories.

Bob
phillips@kcnet.com
http://www.nbrhd.net/CR/CR.htm

NYC,
I skimmed the article. I do not really think that 1900 cal for a man and 1300 for a woman with extra treats thrown in counts as severe restriction.

It is just slighltly restricted. About 200 to 400 cal short of what one really needs. And our bodies learnt to adjust to small short falls.
KM,
When you find that dimmer switch tell me will ya? I would like to see if it is located in the same place on my body!

In undergad school, I had gone on an 800 cal diet. [ Now, that real restriction !] Yes, I lost weight but so also my energyand vast amounts of hair. My skin began to look dull. I also stopped menstruating. I fell sick often and the glands in the base of my ears and behind my neck swelled as they do when fighting infections. My dad got psyched and thought I had contacted tuberculosis when a cough refused to go away for a whole three months.

Also I could not keep up the restriction. After a year or so of feeling severely deprived and very nearly depraved, I gave it up.

Severely restricting my calories makes me think about food all day. I end up feeling as miserable if not more than if I had binged.

I find 1600 cal a great number for me. Healthy at the same time allows for treats. But I have hit a plateau.

After seeing KM's example, I have now reduced it to 1400. A little difficult but the support I get from these forums has kept my spirits up.

Any less and I would wilt! Not in just body - but in soul!

Courtesy of GinBaby: Fainting Dieters Delay New York City Subways

Wow...interesting article. I never knew that there were such people out there who restricted their calories that much. I guess the important thing in this diet is gettign nutrient rich foods.
When I was really thin, I did not eat enough. I ate vegetables and drank skim milk. I allowed myself a proper breakfast only. Cutting back on so many calories made me weak, cold, had my hair falling out and messed up my menstrual cycle. After that, I saw a doctor and started taking multivitamins and had to eat an egg everyday (including the yolk). I slowly gained weight and was healthier.
So I am not too sure about restricting my calorie intake that much.

i've been a light eater since birth. there have been very few points in my life where i've actually eaten 2,000 calories a day (boarding school cafeteria food). when i did, i gained weight to the point where i was borderline overweight.

i average about 1400 calories per day, but have always remained robust and slightly lethargic...i wonder if i'll live to be 160, or at least reap some of the benefits of CR?

Age and metabolism rate have much to do with weight loss and calorie intake. It's a simple math formula...calories in, and calories out. But oh that bread with garlic infused olive oil was a good accompaniment to the salad last night. I agree with the previous posters...the large portions is a cultural issue...so ingrained into our thinking. But it's also about physical activity...green tea...weight training...things that boost the ol metabolic burn rate. Cheers!

My correspondent GinBaby referred me to another story about the CR diet.

This very interesting. We're doing something similar on the Johnson Up Day Down Day Diet. Although we're all doing it mostly to lose weight, it appears (through Dr. Johnson's research) that the diet activates a gene called SIRT 1, and has a similar affect on aging.

If anyone is interested, here's a link to Dr. Johnson's website:

http://www.johnsonupdaydowndaydiet.samsbiz.com/pag e/1ed7e/Home.html

From his website:

The scientific basis of our human experience is described in the article titled The effect on health of alternate day calorie restriction: Eating less and more than needed on alternate days prolongs life (see article).

I don't care much about living to 120 or beyond, but I'd like to be thinner and healthier here and now!

Further to what Angie said above; the up day down day diet came about as a result of research into calorie restrictive diets. They found the same results are achieved by only alternate day restriction, and that lowering the 'down day" (restrictive day) even further, led to weight loss.

I am on this diet (very new to it though - only day four), and finding it very easy and mentally much less stressful! Knowing I can eat relatively freely tomorrow, makes down days a breeze!

it seems to me that any normal, successful diet would have to stem from tracking intake and maintaining it at a low level; CR sounds like a normal-ass diet to me, but with people taking it to the extreme.

I have been logging everything that I eat for over a month now, and actually kind of enjoy it. www.fitday.com is very easy and intuitive, and adds everything up for you (along w/ calculating daily vit/minerals)

I don't talk about my eating habits, I never feel like I am starving or being denied food, and I really don't think that a lasting change to my diet (aka not being fat) is really "all that;" it's how i "should" eat. It's good that these people are eating practically but... it's just a reduction in calories.

I am 1" shorter, and very slightly heavier than the dude in this article (mentioned on page two), and I don't eat or need near 1800 cal/day (well, aside from those wild nights out on the town). It kind of cracks me up and simultaneously pisses me off that he talks about how he's been "starving" himself for months on this. WhatWhat??

But electronic food scales, and software, and constant obsessing? I think my time and money would be better spent towards something that would benefit from all of the attention. I still track my food and intake, but I can do it without all of the superfluous bells and whistles.

Oh yah, and i find it kind of crude/offensive that he denotes his "terribly deprived" 1800 calorie diet as being considered "starved" to a "sub-saharan african;" apparently, a third-world region known for it unfortunately less-than-optimal food/nutrition availability is just as fat and indulgent as the US, and lives on ~2500 cals/day... yah.

I'm 17 and 5'5. How many calories should I be taking in a day? Nathan recommends 1500. Lately I have been eating 1600. But after reading this topic and your responses, it sounds like the number is much lower. For women it sounds more like 1400 and for guys more like 1600-1700. Any recommendations?

Kat